Monday, 19 March 2012
Social Media Discussion and application activity.
How far were the responses of the rioters themselves given space in the media?
During the course of my investigation of the media's reporting on the London riots it became immediately apparent that it was only very rarely that one of the rioters themselves got an opinion across through the media. In fact in all four of my pieces there is not a single one that has a piece from the rioters viewpoint, or indeed any viewpoint other than that of the media. Instead of this there is a lot of scapegoating and making youth's into 'folk devils', then, despite this heavy concentration on the youths themselves; there is little or no reporting including the opinion of a 'youth' or a rioter.
If you type 'London Riots' into Google images, this is the second image to appear on the list, I believe this is fairy representative of how the media chose 'young people' or 'hooded people', focused in upon them and made the public believed that it was entirely this particular subculture that was responsible for the riots.
In fact the only time in which any of this really was included was post-riot, when people were interested in what the viewpoints were, meaning that the media had to report this. This example of mass media 'ignorance' is a great example of why the mass media can be unfair in how it reports a story.
Considering the fact that the media focused so heavily on youths, it is quite surprising the little amount of reporting done on their behalf/from their viewpoint, I believe this is representative of a scapegoat, and the fact that it was easier to simply blame youths, than to report from their viewpoint and perhaps find out the motives. This is obviously because sensationalising within the media means more money.
An example of a report stating that 'two hundred youths' committed an act of violence, however it then states that a thirty five year old man was arrested, meaning that the word 'youths' was simply used as a buzzword in order to help the article sell.
A little after it the entire event was basically blamed entirely upon the youth subculture, a lot of younger people struck back, campaigns such as the 'not in my name' campaign asserted that this stereotyping was unfair, there were a lot of youths trying to make a positive contribution to the riots, and trying to clean up after them. Hashtags like 'cleanuplondon' were formed and hundreds of these so called 'folk devils' took to the streets in order to clean up the mess other people had created.
This shows the power of the media, it can sway a group of people, or turn an entire society against them. Whilst it is true that having immediate communication and the ability to create massive awareness of something incredibly quickly, it also comes with the risk that someone may abuse the power, or that the power is used in order to scapegoat a subculture, it is unfair of the media to suggest that a group of two hundred people comprised only of youths, how old is a 'youth'? Considering an article that suggested this then stated a man of thirty five was arrested, does the media class a a youth as someone that is actually young, or somebody that is committing a crime?
A good example of the media bias is the following Sky Interview with the rioters:
Despite this being one of the rare forays by the media into the rioters viewpoint, I believe that it is completely unfair and biased. It does not give a fair portrayal of the protest started and chooses four completely stereotypical people to give the young audience a voice, and a reason as to why they 'rioted'. These youths state that the reason they rioted was in order to gain material possessions. This is terrible, and the person who is interviewing these people probably knew this, and wanted to show the world what 'rioters' are, however this is an unfair representation, the media know that these people are frankly quite stupid and would say anything in order to appear 'tough' or fit to a stereotype. This is shown by how the camerawork keeps zooming into the tracksuits or the trainers or their bandannas, showing that the cameraman knows that these people fit a negative stereotype and he is trying to increase that. The interviewer did not then go on to interview a university student, or any other different 'youth' subliminally portraying to the audience that all rioters are just like these ones here, and frankly I feel it is unfair that the media take advantage of a situation by scapegoating a subculture in order to gain more money; because this is essentially what they have done. This report is completely biased from the start, despite the caring overtones.
During the course of my investigation of the media's reporting on the London riots it became immediately apparent that it was only very rarely that one of the rioters themselves got an opinion across through the media. In fact in all four of my pieces there is not a single one that has a piece from the rioters viewpoint, or indeed any viewpoint other than that of the media. Instead of this there is a lot of scapegoating and making youth's into 'folk devils', then, despite this heavy concentration on the youths themselves; there is little or no reporting including the opinion of a 'youth' or a rioter.
If you type 'London Riots' into Google images, this is the second image to appear on the list, I believe this is fairy representative of how the media chose 'young people' or 'hooded people', focused in upon them and made the public believed that it was entirely this particular subculture that was responsible for the riots.
In fact the only time in which any of this really was included was post-riot, when people were interested in what the viewpoints were, meaning that the media had to report this. This example of mass media 'ignorance' is a great example of why the mass media can be unfair in how it reports a story.
Considering the fact that the media focused so heavily on youths, it is quite surprising the little amount of reporting done on their behalf/from their viewpoint, I believe this is representative of a scapegoat, and the fact that it was easier to simply blame youths, than to report from their viewpoint and perhaps find out the motives. This is obviously because sensationalising within the media means more money.
A little after it the entire event was basically blamed entirely upon the youth subculture, a lot of younger people struck back, campaigns such as the 'not in my name' campaign asserted that this stereotyping was unfair, there were a lot of youths trying to make a positive contribution to the riots, and trying to clean up after them. Hashtags like 'cleanuplondon' were formed and hundreds of these so called 'folk devils' took to the streets in order to clean up the mess other people had created.
This shows the power of the media, it can sway a group of people, or turn an entire society against them. Whilst it is true that having immediate communication and the ability to create massive awareness of something incredibly quickly, it also comes with the risk that someone may abuse the power, or that the power is used in order to scapegoat a subculture, it is unfair of the media to suggest that a group of two hundred people comprised only of youths, how old is a 'youth'? Considering an article that suggested this then stated a man of thirty five was arrested, does the media class a a youth as someone that is actually young, or somebody that is committing a crime?
A good example of the media bias is the following Sky Interview with the rioters:
Despite this being one of the rare forays by the media into the rioters viewpoint, I believe that it is completely unfair and biased. It does not give a fair portrayal of the protest started and chooses four completely stereotypical people to give the young audience a voice, and a reason as to why they 'rioted'. These youths state that the reason they rioted was in order to gain material possessions. This is terrible, and the person who is interviewing these people probably knew this, and wanted to show the world what 'rioters' are, however this is an unfair representation, the media know that these people are frankly quite stupid and would say anything in order to appear 'tough' or fit to a stereotype. This is shown by how the camerawork keeps zooming into the tracksuits or the trainers or their bandannas, showing that the cameraman knows that these people fit a negative stereotype and he is trying to increase that. The interviewer did not then go on to interview a university student, or any other different 'youth' subliminally portraying to the audience that all rioters are just like these ones here, and frankly I feel it is unfair that the media take advantage of a situation by scapegoating a subculture in order to gain more money; because this is essentially what they have done. This report is completely biased from the start, despite the caring overtones.
Friday, 16 March 2012
Monday, 12 March 2012
Social Media
Social Media and Riots
Social media is used predominataly used be the younger generation in todays society, and used on a daily basis. A lot of teens are always on facebook and it revovles around their lifes. Today in society we have media such as Facebook, Twitter & Blackberry. During the riots social media was portrayed in a postive and negative light. Social media was used to do the clean up process in which young people volunteered to help out and clean up their commuinties. Rioters and looters also used social media in a bad light to organise their criminal offences and try recruit others to join in.
Blackberry And The Riots
Blackberrys in a recent ofcom report highlighted that they were the most popular handset among youths,the handsets are affordable and BBM is private and free.
Blackberry smartphone of choice for majority (37%) of british teens, according to the ofcom report.
Blackberry messenger is untraceable, and that this will (to be finished)
Michel Foucaults Idea
Michel Foucault
For Facault people do not have a "real" identitiy within themselves, thats just a way of talking about self a discourse.
An idenity is communicated to others in your interactions with them, but this is not a fixed thing, within a person it is a shifting temporary construction.
Power is something which can be used and deployed by particular people in specific situations which itself will produce other reactions and resistances and isn't to specific groups or idenities.
Power outcomes are not inevitable and can be resisted.
The discourse in our instance is the justicie and equality enforced by press and news broadcasts.
The power in our instance is the mass media.
mass media have called youths "demontised"
The discourse in our instance is the justicie and equality enforced by press and news broadcasts.
The power in our instance is the mass media.
mass media have called youths "demontised"
How does this link in to today in society?
A discourse today is facebook, we shape our identies we choose what status and images we share with our friends on facebook, this shapes our indenitys but these will chamge over time as people change their identies over time this links in to being a shifting temporary construction.
David Buckingham's idea
"A focus on identity requires us to pay close attention to diverse ways in which media and technologies are used in everyday life, and their consequences for both individuals and for their social groups."
Thursday, 8 March 2012
London Riots Daybreak 9th August 2011
Who do reporters interview?
The news coverage begins with the news reader explaining exactly where the riots have took place and what the latest news is for each town. Firstly Cordelia Kretzschmar speaks from Croydon in south London after spending the night there which she described as "terrifying" and the police updated her saying that the situations in Croydon are far worse than anywhere else in London. This was all because of people she classes as "mobs". She spoke to one woman who had been trapped in a burning building for some time with kids also trapped for hours before police noticed, this shows ordinary families who had nothing to do with the riots had also been badly affected by the actions of others.
A masked youth then spoke out saying youths are angry right now because the government isn't treating them correctly.
The filming moves onto Enfield in north London where a building was on fire all because youths wanted computer games, dvds and cds. They then left a "burning inferno which got out of control".
What images are used in the broadcast? What does this suggest about representation of the riots?
Images of rioters looting and major fires being started are shown at the beginning of the report, the news reader explains how many towns have been affected by the riots with correspondents in each town explaining exactly what trouble and violence has been caused.
On the screen behind her a well known image of a hooded youth standing infront of a burning down building, this image is used in most "riot" related reports, so many people would siamese that youths are the main culprits who are involved in these riots. For example when they see any other hooded person in the street they would unfairly judge them all because this image is focused around "riot chaos", they could have easily just used an image of a burned down building but they have focused it genuinely on one type of group. A live scene is shown of Croydon with horrific sights of burnt down buses and buildings and then explains that mobs of young people trying to set out to destroy their own community, however no images of the mobs are shown at this point in the report, however it does suggest once again youths being represented as the main problem during these riots.
Such a strong and inflamed fire is then shown with many on lookers running for their lives, it just shows that the situation got way out of hand and there was not enough Police on the scene to protect everyone, mainly because they didn't realise just how bad it would get. A scene is then produced of masses of Police cars and workers marching down the roads of Clapham where the streets where like "ghost towns" because everyone had been evacuated for their own safety.
The next live report shows thick black smoke behind the reporters head due to a massive warehouse fire which he again explains it was down to the youths, but no images of them are actually shown, this does make me think that this whole report is linked mainly to the representation of the riots being down to youths.
All the way through the reports they talk about the youths and mobs when it comes to the major attacks on the buildings and looting shops and other places. I do believe they are slightly biased towards these youngsters because when they explain about the damage and disruption that has been caused there is no actual evidence of the youths being involved in any of it, so I think its slightly unfair that they aren't given a voice in these situations to defend themselves as the report focuses on just the reporters personal opinions and comments on what has happened over the past 3 days.
Other reports I have looked at have given youths a fair voice in these situations to explain themselves and let the nation understand why some of them may have been involved and done some of the horrific things like looting and ruining other residents lives on the street. Some will give valid reasons to why they have been involved and some may just say because they are following the crowd. However other youths who wear specific and discret outfits linked to "youth culture" may be really protective of themselves and explain that they had no link to the riots at all and are really upset and angry for people pointing the finger at them for something they didn't do.
But this report symbolises the youths as one thing, negative which isn't right because of the situation being so serious, the argument needs to be balanced.
UK Riots BBC HUB Coverage- 9th August 2011
Who do the reporters interview?
A news reader explains how the riots have developed over the past couple of days and what major problems had occurred. The main blaze of fire came from Croydon and a photographer caught a woman jumping for her life from a burning building. The rioters then come across a youth laid on the floor with blood coming from he's head, possibly had been attacked, they show that they are helping him before robbing he's bag and leaving him on the street.
Jane Ellison an MP, explains if your child comes home wearing a new pair of trainers or owns something that didn't below to them days before ask them some tough questions about how they get them and if you think they got them from looting, take them to the police station and hand them in because they need to learn from there mistakes. A shop owner reveals she came to her shop with clothes all threw and ruined, they are "ferral rats" as they shouldnt be let out in these situations.
What images are used in the broadcast? What does this suggest about representation of the riots?
The first set of images show a divide of the rioters and the police because the two groups do not have the same opinions and feelings towards these attacks being had on society because of one mans death. Fireworks are then seen being let off by the rioters towards the police, which is such a dangerous thing to do because they could have killed one of them, however I don't think that was a problem they thought about when letting the fireworks off because they have so much anger towards the Police force at this time. This was the third night of rioting but they were still determined to cause upset in the main towns, looting was still carrying on as well as large and up roaring fires caused across most of the towns effecting residents who have had nothing to do with the situation themselves, however most of the rioters had a reason for taking part because of Mark Duggan being killed, they wanted to give their opinion and voice on the justice system.
Images of various people such as MP's, shop owners e.c.t explaining their true feelings towards how they have personally been affected by the riots and how it will change their lives in a negative way. The met office then explain that every police cell in London was full to capacity because of that many rioters being involved in all of this chaos.
Is the broadcast biased?
The broadcast shows the images of youths being shown over and over again of youths being deliquent & not doing as they are are supposed to do and abiding by the law, but in reality this is just in the minority of youths therefore tars youths with the same brush.
Are youths given a fair voice?
Tuesday, 6 March 2012
How are Youths represented- london riots
This is a Newsnight special about the London Riots. Broadcast on 12th August *
David Starkey tries to talk about the English Riots on the BBC's flagship current affairs program News night.
* This has Signifigance as this was broadcast towards the end of the riots, bit David Starkley has such a high view and blames all black culture and says somethings that he really shouldn't have said. This then goes on to create devinace amplification as youths may be watching this and they may think well if thats how your going to potray me i am going to act worse.
Who do the reporters interview?
The reporter interviews David Starkely, owen jones, and Drea sea mitchell.
What images are used in the broadcast? What does this say about representation of youths?
The images used within this broadcast of all the three people that are getting invovled. Also in the background are images of broken glass and the damage done at the riots, this reflects a bad image of the youths of what they have done. This therefore reflects to the audience and therefore can reflect a bad image of what has been happening.
is the broadcast biast?
The broadcast is biast as David Starkley has a one sided view on youths in todays society therefore leaving them,
London Riots- How are youths represented?
What images are used within this broadcast?
The images that are potrayed in this broadcast are very negative and can tar all youths with the same brush. The broadcast shows a youth being disrepectful to police offers, as if the youth does not have a care in the world.This then can cause a moral panic which is Stanley Cohen's idea,that the media creates these and therefore make the public worry and threat.
Is the broadcast biast?
The broadcast, is biast as it is shown on tv thefore giving "hooded youths" a bad representation of how youths can act, this therefore can create worry in society and therefore leave people being worried to walk past a youth. As this gives a very negative effect of how youths can act, in relaitly not all youths are like this and it really just in a miniority but as media, create a spin ( meaning stiring things up) which creates moral panics amongst the commuinty's
Are youths given a fair voice?
These youths are not really giving themselves a voice, they are being disrespectful and therefore they are making the moral panic become a realitly so people believe it more.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)